Is 600v available in the US yet?
michaelj
Anything has changed lately?
I'm specifically interrested in Philadelphia area?
Thanks.
Chris Johnston
voltage. Most utilities don't like it because they have to stock more
transformers. Chillers, motors, UPS are readily available as well.
It makes a lot of sense on large projects because it reduces breaker
and conductor sizing for a given load.
Chris Johnston
On Tue, 26 Nov 2002 16:06:34 -0500, "michaelj" <alka...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Peter
<thejoh...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>600Y347 is readily available in the US since it's a standard Canadian
>voltage. Most utilities don't like it because they have to stock more
>transformers.
Much ot the world outside North America has the universal one size
fits all (almost) 400Y230volt system - so flexible, so convenient.
me
Peter <peterwn...@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:3de57f12...@news.paradise.net.nz...
are in-response to both original emailers):
A) I challenge you to find me somewhere in the "US" where 600Y347 is
prevalent. Irrespective of 'most-utilities' wanting-to or not-wanting-to
stock transformers
B) Why do you say that, '..since it's available in Canada(ian)' that it must
also be readily available in the US???? What's your support?
C) What support do you have for 400Y230 being one-size fits all???
After-all, even lower voltages at higher frequencies deliver more respective
power than their brethren. (it's that 'area under the curve' thing that gets
you every time...)
D) 400Y230 is also '...so flexible, so convenient...' based on??
1) the fact that a good portion of the rest of the world is at 50 cycles
while N.America is predominately at 60 cycles - thus basically
'incompatible'
2) on what do you base your '...so flexible, so convenient...'
statement?
3) what does any of this have to do with the price of eggs in china?
Just the rantings of a guy with a killer buzz going......
Peter
>
>C) What support do you have for 400Y230 being one-size fits all???
>After-all, even lower voltages at higher frequencies deliver more respective
>power than their brethren. (it's that 'area under the curve' thing that gets
>you every time...)
400Y230volt systems meet all demand situations from small residential
to heavy commercial and industrial requirements. The next voltage
step that would be contemplated is 3.3kV for very large motors or 11kV
(or whatever the prevailing voltage is) for reticulation around large
facilities. There is just no need for another sub 1kV voltage step as
seems to prevail in North America.
>
>D) 400Y230 is also '...so flexible, so convenient...' based on??
> 1) the fact that a good portion of the rest of the world is at 50 cycles
>while N.America is predominately at 60 cycles - thus basically
>'incompatible'
It is very compatible across a wide part of the world, just like PAL
colour TV is superior to and more compatible than NTSC.
> 2) on what do you base your '...so flexible, so convenient...'
>statement?
It gives enormous flexibility in distribution planning. For example a
150kVA 3 phase transformer (all in one tank connected Dy11) can supply
80 dwellings in lower density areas and a 1500kVA transformer 1000
dwellings in very high density areas. In underground areas this
greatly reduces the amount of HT reticulation and number of
transformers needed at significant cost savings.
> 3) what does any of this have to do with the price of eggs in china?
I think North America made a bad choice with 120 volts.
>
>Just the rantings of a guy with a killer buzz going......
Can't help it - been used to 230v 50Hz all my life and have worked in
the transmission / distribution industry.
Dave
> It gives enormous flexibility in distribution planning. For example a
> 150kVA 3 phase transformer (all in one tank connected Dy11) can supply
> 80 dwellings in lower density areas and a 1500kVA transformer 1000
> dwellings in very high density areas. In underground areas this
> greatly reduces the amount of HT reticulation and number of
> transformers needed at significant cost savings.
But if the transformer goes kaput, that's a lot of people without power, and
I believe this system is the basis of the rantings and ravings of the Volts
Commissar (www.voltscommissar.net).
> I think North America made a bad choice with 120 volts.
Bad choice? That voltage was a carryover from the early DC systems - and the
Edison 3-wire system was the most efficient system at the time (120V for
lighting and 240V for power), and once AC was proven more efficient,
compatibility may have been the reason these voltages were kept... I can't
imagine requiring 240V to feed consumer electronics or lighting - but just
TRY using a stove or running air conditioning on 120V - now THAT is a bad
choice :P
> Can't help it - been used to 230v 50Hz all my life and have worked in the
transmission / distribution industry.
You're entitled to your opinions :)
Dave
Chris Johnston
not appropriate for every project, but it is for some where you must
have large quantities of low voltage power. Large data centers are a
prime example; I have participated in designing several. One project
has six 3000KVA KVA substations supplying the UPS systems. At 480V
you must use 4000A main breakers and bussing, while you can use 3200A
at 600V. 600V feeders save about 25% on copper cost vs. 480V.
Chris Johnston
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 22:08:55 -0500, "me" <m...@nowhere.com> wrote:
Seppo
peterwn...@paradise.net.nz (Peter) wrote:
>On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 22:08:55 -0500, "me" <m...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>C) What support do you have for 400Y230 being one-size fits all???
>>After-all, even lower voltages at higher frequencies deliver more respective
>>power than their brethren. (it's that 'area under the curve' thing that gets
>>you every time...)
>400Y230volt systems meet all demand situations from small residential
>to heavy commercial and industrial requirements. The next voltage
>step that would be contemplated is 3.3kV for very large motors or 11kV
>(or whatever the prevailing voltage is) for reticulation around large
>facilities. There is just no need for another sub 1kV voltage step as
>seems to prevail in North America.
Well, 690 V is used in industry in Europe, too.
And 690 V is a new voltage (used to be 660 V), not
a relic.
Seppo
s falke
Side note -- In 60Hz, 830Y/480 is used in oilfields, and 1040Y/600 is used in
mining,
[Maybe there's 50Hz 1200Y/690 somewhere.]
--s falke
"Seppo" <Se...@aho-Sauna.com> wrote
BF Deleen
industrial projects. My experience is the 4.16 KV medium voltage (MV) is
better than the 3.3 kV system and the 600 V system is better than the 400 V
and 380 V systems. The 480 V system is also an improvement over the 400 V
system.
The 400 or 380 V systems are inefficient for low voltage (LV) in industrial
systems. The amperage rating of MCC and switchgear is much larger than for a
600 V system. That creates problems of larger conductor sizes, larger
breakers and so on. The maximum 380 V motor size, before going to MV, looks
very small after working on 600 V systems. In the countries I worked on
designs for, they usually jumped from the 400 V system to 6 kV (or 6.3 or
6.6), bypassing the 3.3 KV, because 3.3 KV is limited for a group of popular
motor sizes in a process, that are used in practice. The 6 kV systems cross
the 5 kV line while the 4.16 kV does not.
That is my experience.
"Peter" <peterwn...@paradise.net.nz> wrote in message
news:3de599a9...@news.paradise.net.nz...
Michael Lamond
"Chris Johnston" <thejoh...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:0n7cuukaeou3jkljr...@4ax.com...
> I said 600Y347 was readily available in the USA, not prevalent. It's
> not appropriate for every project, but it is for some where you must
> have large quantities of low voltage power. Large data centers are a
> prime example; I have participated in designing several. One project
> has six 3000KVA KVA substations supplying the UPS systems. At 480V
> you must use 4000A main breakers and bussing, while you can use 3200A
> at 600V. 600V feeders save about 25% on copper cost vs. 480V.
>
> Chris Johnston
>
buildings had 600 volt power, but each building had its own transformer
and distribution was at higher voltage. As for those six substations,
who
owns them, the customer or the utility? The last time I looked, and I
can't
find it quickly on the web site, Niagara Mohawk only offered services at
the following voltages. Any other service was at the distribution
voltage
into customer owned equipment.
* 120 volt 30 amp single phase (only instrumentation, traffic signals,
etc.)
* 120/240 volt single phase
* 208Y120 volt three phase
* 480Y277 volt three phase
Mike
Chris Johnston
utility supplies 12KV. At another site, the utility owns eight 2.5MVA
transformers with 24KV primaries and 600Y347 secondaries. Chillers
and 3-phase motors are 575V.
Chris Johnston
michaelj
Judging what is better was not my intention.
Let me rephrase.
Is 600/347 available to commercial customers as standard voltage?
If I remember right, few years back national code forbade anything over
300v phase to ground.
Has anything changed since then?
Thanks.
"Chris Johnston" <thejoh...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:ns1euuor8jaksiab6...@4ax.com...
s falke
Minor aside -- 600V delta used in some (south of the border) Idaho-panhandle
saw
mills. [Maybe not for "new" service]
"Yup, 1 amp per horsepower."
--s falke
Chris Johnston
voltage for cotton mills. I suspect that GE or Westinghouse (or both)
came up with this voltage when they electrified many of the old mills
that were formerly steam driven.
Regards,
Chris Johnston
On Wed, 04 Dec 2002 18:21:01 GMT, "s falke" <bus...@pacbell.net>
wrote: